Aryan95614/aerograph-asrs huggingface dataset:
Aircraft: HEAVY TRANSPORT
Phase of flight: Taxi
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy

Arrived to park at a Gate requires a 45 degree turn for 15 yards and then an arc turn and then final alignment. Ramp guys were situated to not have two guide men. [They] gave us lots of dirty looks and shrugs when we didn't move awaiting proper ramp personnel. One guy slid one of two wands to the other thinking I wasn't moving due to lack of wands. After 5 minutes of both engines running and us telling them by hand signals and radio to Operations they put persons in proper spots to park at a dog leg gate. Last marshaller commands were comical as when he received us for final guidance he actually commanded a turn opposite the direction we were in on the arc to the right. Amazing. Approaching stop point he wanted us to go left a bit and he commanded that by bending his upper body that way with his hands above he is head for stop point; kind of like he was a kicker on a field goal. This would be funny if it weren't so sad as to what ramp operations at EWR are. Pretty sloppy. Asked for a supervisor and he got on headset after blocking and commented his appreciation and said 'these guys need to take this more seriously.' I'm starting to wonder if he means the higher ups in addition to my guide man group. [We] wasted a lot of fuel for this charade. A Captain reported EWR ramp personnel did not marshal his aircraft in to the gate in a safe manner.
Aircraft: WIDEBODY; LOW WING; 3 TURBOJET ENG
Phase of flight: Descent
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT

Our initial clearance had us arriving in Toluca at PTJ VOR for the approach and ILS to Runway 15. The sun was coming up behind us making the landscape visible. At about 30 miles from PTJ; we were told to go to Toluca Approach. We checked in at 15;000 MSL. MSA was 15;000 FT. After a short pause Approach Control told us to turn to a heading of 140. This took us off the arrival. I told the Controller that the heading he gave us put us directly on a collision course for the mountain. He insisted on the heading so I complied thinking there was a traffic conflict. We were about 20 miles from the mountain. At about 10 miles from the mountain he gave us another heading change to 135 heading. This put us smack in the middle of the mountain.At this point I told the Approach Controller negative; we were turning back to the right to PTJ to assume the approach and ILS for Runway 15. There was a pause and then the Controller said we were cleared as requested. After intercepting the localizer we were handed over to Tower and were cleared to land. Why were we taken off an approved arrival which has kept us out of harms way all these years? I have been flying down her for 5 years so I know the lay of the land. This is a very challenging airport and there is no room for error with the high terrain. We have to have safe and standard procedures to keep us safe. [Narrative 2 contained no additional information.] Air Carrier flight crew reported being vectored toward mountainous terrain on arrival to MMTO.
Aircraft: MD80
Phase of flight: Initial Approach
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types

In the weather on a heading to intercept [Runway] 35C LOC; during turn onto LOC; LOC signal failed. Pilot Flying (PF) overturned LOC and started correcting. RAPCON; gave a correction and LOC came back. LOC failed again as we were intercepting for a second time. LOC continued to fail 3-4 times causing us to weave left and right on final. At about 5-6 miles we stabilized; finished the approach and landed uneventfully. In the weather; we were turning left to intercept 35C localizer about 10 miles out and the localizer failed. Pilot Flying (PF) overturned a little and started correcting. RAPCON (127.07) gave us a correction and the localizer came back. We were intercepting and it failed again. It failed 3-4 times for a second or 2; causing us to weave down final. About 5-6 miles out we stabilized; finished the approach; and landed uneventfully. Not sure if we exited our corridor. The ID on the localizer (at 10-12 miles) was weak but readable with a lot of static. Usually DFW localizers are loud and clear out to 20 miles or more. I spoke with a RAPCON supervisor and he flagged our conversation on a note. He was very informative and helpful. He said they had been having sporadic problems with some DFW antennas. Using a Navigation overlay could help; but it can be a little off; also; even under normal circumstances. On an ILS final approach; the crew of a MD-80 crew experienced an intermittent localizer signal. The crew landed safely after the help of ATC headings.
Aircraft: A330
Phase of flight: Initial Approach
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy

Visual approach; airplane was configured for landing with full flaps; prior to selecting the landing gear down. This is a non-standard order and not done intentionally. Landing gear was selected down at 900 FT MSL after recognition that the landing gear was not down; prior to any aircraft warning but too late for a stabilized approach. Normally gear is selected down when selecting flaps 3 and occurs well above 1;000 FT. Contributing factors to why the event occurred were 1. A distraction on the FMS / Flight Director showing an altitude constraint of 3;300 FT on the ILS 8L while we were flying a hand-flown visual approach and 2. Fatigue after a long flight. A fatigued and distracted A330 crew selected the gear down at 900 FT on a visual approach with landing flaps set.
Aircraft: SMALL AIRCRAFT
Phase of flight: Taxi
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Conflict Ground Conflict; Less Severe; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Ground Incursion Runway

Aircraft X wanted to taxi from [FBO] located on the north side of the airport to his hangar located on the south side. Due to [FBO] offering the cheapest fuel on the airfield; multiple parallel runway crossings with Local North and Local South Controller occur during times of heavy traffic regardless of where their hangars are located. Aircraft X was instructed at first to taxi onto Charlie and hold short of Bravo while other aircraft were requesting taxi instructions. I then told Aircraft X to cross Runway 17 on Charlie and hold short of 27R on Alpha. I let Local North (27R) controller know that taxiway Alpha was blocked; due to an aircraft landing [27L] in case he needed to exit the runway onto Alpha. Local North could not get the instructions to aircraft out in time to continue taxiing down the runway. The landing aircraft exited on Alpha. I then told Aircraft X to hold short of 27L on Bravo to prevent a nose to nose situation. Aircraft X read back hold short 27L on Bravo and then questioned if he could cross Runway 27R. I was offline coordinating with Local North controller to request to cross 27R after departing traffic while other aircraft called requesting for taxi. I did not catch transmission right away and Aircraft X crossed 27R while departing aircraft was taxiing onto the runway for departure. I issued brasher warning to Aircraft X and he called the Tower saying he was instructed to hold short 27L on Bravo. He took that as permission to cross Runway 27R.I recommend that the FBOs come to an agreement on a general price of fuel range on the airfield. I understand it is a business and they are competing; but the ground traffic complexity is amplified due to the amount of opposite direction parallel runway crossings that happen during busy times of traffic. We try to use the first come; first serve basis but a lot of pilots become irate when they are waiting for long periods of time due to not being the priority. Also; if the pilot questions an instruction; maybe it is better to go back and verify than assume. SEE Ground Controller reported a runway incursion attributed to aircraft taxiing to different FBO's for cheaper gas prices on the airport.
Aircraft: SKYLANE 182/RG TURBO SKYLANE/RG
Phase of flight: landing
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Less Severe; Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft; Ground Excursion Runway; Inflight Event / Encounter Unstabilized Approach

Encountered heavy traffic while holding. Decided to divert to land and wait for better traffic conditions. AWOS reported 8 knot crosswind with some gusting. At roundout for landing sensed increasing sink rate. Applied full power to slow sink rate but experienced hard landing. At touchdown; the right main wheel assembly departed the aircraft. Aircraft veered to the right off the runway into soft ground and stopped. Two passengers and the pilot exited the aircraft through the right and left doors. No one was injured. In light of the high traffic and hot and humid weather conditions; flying a longer downwind leg would have given me more time to adjust to flight conditions and make a better landing. On inspecting the right main gear assembly; two days post event; there were signs of corrosion and what appeared to be fatigue fractures at the end of the gear strut. I believe the hard landing probably precipitated an already impending failure. C182 pilot reported the right main wheel departed the aircraft after a hard landing in crosswind conditions.
Aircraft: A319
Phase of flight: Taxi
Anomaly: Flight Deck / Cabin / Aircraft Event Smoke / Fire / Fumes / Odor

On taxi into ZZZ from ZZZ1 today; we had a strong smell of 'stinky feet' on the Flight Deck. The APU was on MEL from a previous write up of the same nature and was not being used. We parked shortly after smelling this and contacted Maintenance to have the issue addressed. An AML entry was made and the form was completed when Maintenance arrived at aircraft. The flight attendants did not notice the smell; nor did the passengers; as far as we were told. I notified the Chief Pilot's office that I felt fine; but would be more comfortable having myself checked; and went to have a follow up medical visit done at the [company] clinic there in ZZZ. No medical issues were found at that time. [Report narrative contained no additional information] A319 flight crew reported a strong odor of 'stinky feet' during taxi in at destination.
Aircraft: BE-KA
Phase of flight: Descent
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Altitude Excursion From Assigned Altitude; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Inflight Event / Encounter CFTT / CFIT

While conducting OJT for my trainee; I ensured separation between Aircraft X and a preceding aircraft using vertical separation. Aircraft X entered a known non-radar area and the trainee asked the preceding aircraft his altitude and they responded with level at 7;000 ft. The trainee then issued Aircraft X 8;000 ft. to which the replay was that he was already cleared to 4;000 ft. We asked his altitude and he told us 4;200 ft. The minimum IFR altitude in that area is 4;600 ft. and Aircraft X was climbed to 6;000 ft. but no warning was issued. We did not issue this altitude to this aircraft and confirmed it by reviewing the audio recording after our training session. I do not believe longitudinal separation was lost between Aircraft X and the preceding aircraft due to routings and issued holding instructions. Overall I feel that this was pilot error in a non-radar environment. Having and ADSB-GBT or WAM (Wide Area Multi-lateration) in the area would have given us enough radar coverage to have noticed the early descent out of 15;000 ft. and we could have corrected it before the aircraft descended below the minimum IFR altitude. Center Controller reported that an aircraft descended below the minimum IFR altitude in a non-radar area; resulting in CFTT.
Aircraft: A330
Phase of flight: Parked
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Hazardous Material Violation; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy

One package containing Dry Ice was loaded in Net Section 51. It was just standing there alone; not secured by lashing or by other load. Airline Ground Personnel reported configuration errors during unloading at arrival.
Aircraft: SMALL AIRCRAFT
Phase of flight: Landing
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Ground Strike - Aircraft; Ground Event / Encounter Object; Ground Excursion Runway

Event: During landing and braking on turf runway; the aircraft drifted to the right of the runway. Correction for drifting was applied. The aircraft entered an uncut portion of the turf. The tall grass unknowingly concealed areas of untreated and rough ground. Outcome: No one was injured. The front castoring wheel snapped with the aircraft stopping and resting on the front landing strut. A propeller blade struck the ground and bent; and the engine stopped while at idle speed.Possible causes: Drifting possibly caused by hard surface grading (sloping to the right) and reduced traction of gear as the aircraft glided on grass. Castoring wheel snapping off caused by rough ground while soft-field technique applied. Prevention: Post a warning in the chart supplementals. Clear 50 ft obstacles on both ends of runway. Clear the uncut grass to expose dangers. Place warning signs for pilots and/or fence off unusable area to prevent pilots from entering. GA pilot reported a turf runway excursion that led to damage from rough surface conditions concealed by tall grass.
Aircraft: NO AIRCRAFT
Phase of flight: holding
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy

I was trunnioning the LPC [Low Pressure Compressor]. The balance arbor became detached from the LPC during the trunnion process and fell to the floor damaging 12 each 2.3 blades. The tooling work bolts used to attach the arbor to the LPC were provided by EGAT and were too short. Suggestion to add a caution to the JIC [Job Instruction Card] stating the minimum size bolts to use when attaching the arbor to the LPC. Attachment of handling slings to balance arbor of LPC [Low Pressure Compressor]; bolts too short on end with sleeve on arbor. Going to vertical position - sleeve section slipped off/detached from rest or Arbor. LPC Disc was from a training engine from Pratt and Whitney. Working off Job Card training with Pratt representative/trainer. Sling tooling bolts too short. Trunnion LPC attached to arbor from horizontal work stand to upside down position (vertical) sleeve detached; LPC fell to ground on one end. Note in Job Card for minimum length of bolts to be used with tooling. Better holding compartment of sling tool bolts to be kept with sling tool - proper bolts kept together. Technicians reported incorrect bolts used on device to lift engine compressor disc resulted in damage to blades.
Aircraft: B737
Phase of flight: Descent
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance

Flying the OHSEA 1 Arrival into SNA. The RNAV (RNP) Z Runway 20R was loaded into FMC. We were told to expect the RNAV (GPS) Y Runway 20R. At two-miles from KLEVR I programmed the FMC with the new approach. Then as I was cleaning up the LEGS page; the LNAV disconnect flashed in the scratch pad momentarily and the aircraft went straight instead of making the turn at KLEVR. We corrected the turn to get back on course. ATC asked our heading and we told them what happened. He gave us a heading and said no problem. He vectored us to final and we landed uneventfully. B737-700 Captain reported a track deviation resulted when the flight crew tried to reprogram the FMC following a late clearance change from ATC.
Aircraft: B757
Phase of flight: Landing
Anomaly: Ground Event / Encounter Other / Unknown; Inflight Event / Encounter Wake Vortex Encounter

Upon touchdown and landing with flaps 25; The nose aggressively pitched up when the spoilers deployed. The pitch attitude appeared higher than normal and increasing. I could not discern if we had become airborne again. The landing was normal; calm winds; landing behind a Boeing 767. At this point my First Officer stated...'watch your pitch'. I elected to go around. We carried out the procedure and were vectored back around to land.Suspect a flaps 25 landing/ spoiler deployment combined with possible wake from preceding 767. Flaps 30 landing to help prevent a higher pitch attitude upon landing. B757 Captain reported experiencing a pitch-up after landing that led to a go-around.
Aircraft: LARGE TRANSPORT; LOW WING; 2 TURBOJET ENG
Phase of flight: Taxi
Anomaly: Conflict Ground Conflict; Critical

While taxiing out of Newark on Taxiway Z approaching Z3 a helicopter took off and went in front of our aircraft's nose with less than 10 feet of clearance. Had I not slammed on the brakes it could have been disastrous. I reported it to ground and dispatch. Air carrier Captain reported they experienced a near collision with a helicopter while taxiing on Z near Z3 at EWR. The helicopter had apparently been cleared for takeoff from the helipad on Z3 but conflicted with the aircraft; requiring firm braking.
Aircraft: TURBO COMMANDER 690 SERIES
Phase of flight: Descent
Anomaly: Aircraft Equipment Problem Critical

I departed for a night VFR flight. An IFR flight plan at 10;000 feet had been filed for the flight but prior to departure; I requested the IFR clearance be changed to VFR flight following with a cruising altitude of 10;500 feet. The flight was anticipated to be around a 30 minute flight and there was approximately 3 hours of fuel on board. There were 3 souls on board; the pilot and two passengers. Takeoff and climb out were normal. While enroute at 10;500 feet; the low voltage light flickered once; there was a brief buzzing sound in the headsets and the right generator tripped offline. I did not attempt to reset the generator. I checked the load on the remaining (left) generator and it was under 100 amps. As a precaution; I turned off the pitot static heat and made sure the AC compressor was offline (it was). Approximately 5 minutes later; I began a descent from 10;500 to 3;500. At this point I was approximately 40 miles from [destination]. As I was descending through approximately 8;500 feet; the passenger in the rear of the plane alerted us that there were sparks coming out of the generator vents of the engine cowling. It appeared that there was a mechanical issue with the generator as well as electrical. I elected to shut down the right engine as a precaution and [advised ATC]. At this point I was approximately 10 minutes from [destination]. I elected to continue. [After landing] the emergency equipment followed the airplane to the ramp. I shutdown the engines and all of the occupants exited the airplane normally through the door on the left side of the plane. The firefighters inquired as to the situation and I informed them that it all appeared to be normal. There was no evidence of smoke or fire; so the fire equipment returned to their base and I put the plane in the hangar. I then notified the chief pilot of the situation so repairs could be initiated. AC90 pilot reported shutting down the right engine after a passenger noticed sparks coming from the cowling following a generator failure.
Aircraft: B737
Phase of flight: Takeoff / Launch
Anomaly: Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Other / Unknown

I just think this is worth reporting because in nearly 16 years on the 737 I have never seen the aircraft do this before and had just heard the same story from a different FO (First Officer) about another high altitude airport. Initially we were looking at an intersection departure; bleeds off; but we ended up almost 3000 pounds lighter than planned. We ended up Flaps 5; bleeds on from the intersection with a reduced power of 98.9 (max 100.7). Winds were 200 at 16 kts with a gust. I believe it was less than 20 kts. We elected to use the reduced setting. Aircraft accelerated normally with no airspeed deviations. V1 145; VR 146. FO noted groundspeed 180 kts near the end of rotation.I usually rotate to about 5 deg; hesitate and let the aircraft break ground then continue the rotation. The aircraft did not break ground until somewhere between 7 and 7.5 degrees. Once we broke ground; it did not climb. As I felt the end of the runway was getting too close; I continued the rotation to about 10 degrees. The aircraft recorder recorded 9.8 departure pitch similar to what I thought I did. That was when the aircraft started climbing.The FO and I discussed this at some length and felt we did everything correctly. He also said he noted nothing abnormal with the departure; power setting (it actually settled on 99.1- 02 above reduced) or any part of the takeoff roll except that he noted I kept pulling back farther and farther on the yoke and the aircraft was not climbing. Although we are aware of no mistakes we made on this takeoff; it is worth noting that had the aircraft not started climbing within a very short time after it did; I probably would have been firewalling the throttles and risking a tail strike with increased pitch. During takeoff roll at a high-altitude airport; B-737 crew experienced an abnormally slow start of the aircraft climb after rotation. Crew felt that it took more nose up pitch than normal for the aircraft to break ground.
Aircraft: B737
Phase of flight: Takeoff / Launch
Anomaly: Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy

On the PORTE 5 Departure off of 28L in SFO; the normal procedure is to turn to a 330 degree heading at 420 MSL; however; the Captain pointed out an FDC NOTAM that stated to fly 014 degrees (runway heading) until 2;000 FT MSL. When we did this; ATC told us to turn left immediately; and that they had no knowledge of the NOTAM. After a discussion with Company ATC guys; we realized that it was an alternate climb gradient procedure that was poorly written in the weather packet and confusing. Our clearance was the PORTE 5 Departure which requires a turn to 330 degrees at 420 FT MSL when departing on Runway 1L or 1R out of SFO. We reviewed the entire NOTAM group in the weather packet as there were a lot of NOTAMS for SFO. An FDC NOTAM had been issued that read:'Departure Procedures AMDT 8' CHANGE DEPARTURE PROCEDURE TO READ; RWYS 1L; 1R; CLIMB HEADING 014 TO 2000 THENCE...CONTINUE CLIMB ON COURSE; REST REMAINS AS PUBLISHED.' We read and reread this NOTAM several times to ensure that we were reading it correctly. When we departed; NorCal asked us why we hadn't turned yet and I advised him that there was an FDC NOTAM that modified the procedure. I read it to him verbatim. He advised there was no conflict and I told him that we would alert our Dispatch and others as to the potential problem. On arrival LAX; I contacted our Company ATC Specialists and alerted them to this confusion as well as Flight Dispatch. One of our Specialists contacted the Manager of NorCal; and after they reviewed the FDC; he agreed that it was confusing and poorly written. The other Specialist subsequently discussed it with them as well and they said it pertained only to obstacle climb gradient issues; not all 1L and 1R departures. There are required climb gradients on the PORTE 5; but nowhere on the FDC NOTAMs does it specify a particular departure procedure. Anyway; in trying to be conscientious; we ended up in a rather confusing situation with Departure Control. Whether or not they rewrite this particular FDC is to be determined; but it is extremely insidious in that you believe that it applies to all 1L/1R departures and at the very end of the NOTAM it says 'this is takeoff minimums and (obstacle) departure procedures AMDT 8A.' No traffic conflict resulted; but it definitely was confusing. B737 flight crew notes an FDC NOTAM apparently instructing them to maintain runway heading to 2;000 FT departing Runway 1L at SFO on the PORT 5 departure. ATC advises this is not correct and that the procedure is a revision to the obstacle departure procedure only.